2.007 MIT Robotics Competition, 2025 Challenge Wicked FBD: Applying Gravity
2.007 MIT Robotics Competition, 2025 Challenge Wicked FBD: Applying Gravity
Embedded Files
Tournament Highlights
Tournament Highlights
Robot 2 Stealing the Broom!
Robot 2 Lifting Heels
Robot 1 Deployment/ Latch Mechanism
Project Overview
Project Overview
This year’s 2.007 gameboard challenge was inspired by the musical Wicked, featuring a range of themed scoring elements scattered across a multi-leveled field. Players had a minute and a half each round to compete head-to-head, earning points by manipulating props such as poppies, a giant head, levers, balloons, and other symbolic artifacts. Each of these props had different point values, physical accessibility and degree of difficulty to manipulate. After a thorough analysis of the point structure and time constraints, I settled on a strategy involving four key scoring actions:
Simultaneously toggling the three levers throughout the match, which provided a high and continuous point stream. I engineered a passive latch mechanism that would lock onto all three levers and cycle them with minimal input.
Scoring the red ruby heels and other high-value game pieces, by lifting them into elevated scoring zones using a four bar linkage lift for precise vertical control.
Pushing the poppies into the designated scoring area using a low-profile rake, designed to gather and push multiple poppies at once.
Activating the head multiplier, a rotating prop that, when pushed to the correct position, would double all points scored for the remainder of the match.
In order to meet these requirements, I developed and executed a dual-robot strategy. The idea was to create two specialized systems that could operate simultaneously: one robot dedicated to high-frequency lever toggling for continuous scoring, and another robot designed to complete the other object manipulation tasks: pushing the head multiplier, lifting weighted heels into elevated scoring zones, and pushing the poppies into the scoring zone. This allowed me to maximize scoring potential while minimizing the load on any single robot system.
Robot 2
Robot 2
Objective:
Objective:
Maximize score by activating 2x multiplier, scoring the heels into the highest elevated scoring zone, and pushing poppies into the scoring zone.
Key Features:
Key Features:
Four bar linkage lift mechanism
Four bar linkage lift mechanism
Four bar linkage CAD model in retracted (left) and fully extended (right) positions. This mechanism allowed the robot to lift game pieces (heels) up to 19 inches, reaching the elevated scoring zones while keeping the rake perpendicular to the ground for controlled placement. Each joint was built using a screw shaft setup, providing a rigid axle interface combined with a bearing for low-friction, smooth articulation. The motor was connected to the lift arms using roll pins for a compact and reliable transmission
Pugh chart to inform which strategy to use to lift heels
Calculations for which gear ratio to use for four bar
Flip-out rake
Flip-out rake
The rake mechanism was designed to flip out after the match began to comply with the 1’×1’×1’ starting size requirement. The rake used gravity to be held in place while the robot was in its starting position and used inertia and gravity to swing down into its extended position once the match began.
The rake allowed the robot to fork under the heels, lifting them into the elevated zone to score points. It also enabled the robot to gather and push/lift multiple poppies at a time into the scoring area.
Fabrication:
Fabrication:
Four wheel belt drive
Four wheel belt drive
Custom belt drive: I used a belt drive to be able to deliver power to all four wheels which provided the traction needed to climb up and down the ramp. I made a custom length belt and then used a CNC to mill the pulley, shaft coupler, and wheels so that I could bolt them closely together to optimize space, allowing me to fit the two robots within the starting space. Each shaft was supported by precision bearings to reduce friction and improve drivetrain efficiency.
Modular assembly: The robot was fully designed in SolidWorks and fabricated using waterjet-cut aluminum sheets (3/16" and 1/16" thickness). It was intentionally built with a modular architecture, dividing the system into independent subassemblies such as the drivetrain, lift, and rake. This approach greatly simplified assembly, maintenance, and rapid iteration during testing. To address potential tolerance stack-up issues, I incorporated slotted holes for adjustability and custom angle bracket connectors, ensuring precise alignment
Rubber band assisted actuation: To reduce strain on the lift motors, rubber bands were integrated into the lift system allowing for the robot to effortlessly lift the heels and the poppies.
Robot 1
Robot 1
Objective:
Objective:
Maximize point scoring by reliably cycling all three scoring levers at a two second interval, using a compact robot so it can fit in the size constraints with another robot and operates using no more than two motors, so the other robot can use up to six motors to complete complex tasks (8 motor limit).
Key Features:
Key Features:
Passive lever latch
Passive lever latch
The mechanism uses three rubber band powered latches that require less than 3N of force for the levers to pass through, so the levers don't get prematurely toggled. Then, the latches close behind the levers, allowing the robot to drive back and forth simultaneously scoring points on all three levers.
Match start expansion mechanism
Match start expansion mechanism
To fit both robots within the 1′×1′×1′ starting size requirement, the lever-cycling arms began in a folded position. A passive release mechanism was used to deploy them at match start: a small metal tab attached to the wheel held a tensioned string in place. The string was routed through a guide and wrapped over the arms, counteracting the force of a stretched rubber band trying to pull them down. When the match began and the robot drove forward, the wheel rotated, releasing the tab and the string. This allowed the rubber bands to pull the arms down into their fully extended position without needing any motors. The mechanism used only gravity and elastic tension, conserving motors and space while ensuring reliable deployment every match.
Wheelie bar
Wheelie bar
To maintain stability while rapidly toggling the three scoring levers, I added a lightweight front-mounted wheelie bar. During matches, each lever applied significant horizontal force far from the robot’s center of gravity, creating a forward-tipping torque. Instead of counterweights, which would exceed the combined weight limit for my two robots, the wheelie bar passively contacted the ground when pitching occurred, preventing tip-over without adding unnecessary mass.
Fabrication:
Fabrication:
Four wheel belt drive
Four wheel belt drive
CAD (Cardboard Aided Design): With limited time to design and build two full robots, I began with rapid prototyping using cardboard to simulate components and test dimensions. This "Cardboard-Aided Design" approach was especially helpful in refining the latching mechanism, allowing me to quickly test different geometries and interactions before committing to final CAD models. These quick-turn prototypes dramatically sped up the development cycle by helping me dial in final part sizing and tolerances before moving to aluminum.
Modular assembly: Once the core design was validated, I fully modeled the robot in SolidWorks and fabricated it using 1/16” aluminum sheet metal, primarily cut on the bandsaw and shaped with a manual sheet metal brake. The robot was designed as a modular system, with clearly defined subassemblies for the drivetrain, front wheelie bar, passive latch mechanism, match-start fold-out mechanism, and its mounting structure. These modules were independently fabricated and bolted together, which simplified both initial assembly and later iterations.
Coding: Because the class only allows you to use one RC transmiter, to control this robot I had to use an arduino and a PS2 controller to control the robot. I used the PS2X_lib library to read joystick values from the PS2 controller and then control the robot. The PS2 controller was quite sensitive and had a significant amount of stick drift. Additionally, the robot required very little turning as its primary job was to simply drive forward and backwards. As such, I decided to implement a cubic shaping function to make turning more precise and smoother as well as creating a deadzone to prevent unintended spinning.
Competition Results
Competition Results
1st place
The dual-robot system delivered outstanding performance in competition, combining reliability, speed, and strategic execution. Over the course of the event, I won six consecutive matches in an elimination bracket, ultimately securing first place overall out of 140 competitors in MIT’s 2.007 head-to-head robotics tournament. My robots also achieved a record-breaking score of 725.4 points, the highest in the entire competition.
International Design Award
In addition, I was awarded the International Design Award, honoring outstanding mechanical design, creativity, and technical excellence.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse